Tax Day has come and gone, and most of us can now breathe a sigh of relief as the hard part is finally over. While some still await their refunds, the media has showcased a bit of tax drama surrounding the upcoming presidential election. The following example illustrates how communicating only information can result in misinformation!

On Friday, April 13th, President Obama rereleased over ten years worth of tax returns, and has since urged Senator Mitt Romney to do the same. Romney has released his 2010 tax return and estimates for his 2011 tax return, for which he is filing an extension. But why just two years of data?

“John Kerry released two years of taxes,” Romney told a reporter from CNBC. But, as The Huffington Post pointed out, that statement is not entirely accurate. Kerry had previously released 20 years of tax returns throughout his political career in the Senate, and then additionally released two years of returns during his presidential bid in 2004. So Romney may have based his decision on partial information.

It should also be noted that Romney had released a personal financial disclosure form from 2006 for his previous presidential bid. What is really interesting is that there is no legal requirement for presidents and presidential candidates to release this information. It is merely a tradition, not law. Let’s hear some of your thoughts on this. Should presidential candidates disclose their tax returns? Does this information affect your attitudes toward the candidates? After all, information is power, but how much of that power should be given away?

Eileen N. Sinett Communications

For most of us, reading and writing were part and parcel of our elementary curriculum.  We were diligently taught how letters made sounds, sounds made syllables, syllables made words, and words made phrases and sentences.  We were taught to process what we read, to read for information and the subtleties that were “between the lines.”  Our ability to read aloud, as well as to understand what was printed, was shaped, measured and graded repeatedly.  After learning how to read, we were taught to write, and similarly were guided to understand topic sentences, transitions, opinion vs. fact, etc.  With this guidance our skills for reading and writing were then applied to learning — history, science, philosophy, etc.

Not so true for speaking and listening, the other communication elements, We entered school assumed to be proficient speakers and to know how to listen.  I personally was a first-grade “chatterbox” and my listening instruction was basically a threat to “be quiet or else.”  For most, speaking and listening were not taught directly as were other subjects. It was assumed that speaking one to one, speaking in a group discussion or speaking publicly (oral reports, show and tell, etc.) were all the same.

Fast forward a decade and these elementary students are going to college, going on interviews, competing for jobs, vying for promotions at work, giving presentations, leading discussions and facilitating teams. Some will be offered training through their work: seminars in presentation skills, listening, team building, sales, leadership, etc.  However, the vast majority will have to navigate this knowledge independently.

Employees, entrepreneurs, executives, managers and human resource professionals will identify gaps in work performance – their own or their direct reports.  Communication disconnects continue:  He just doesn’t “get it”;  she needs to speak up;  he comes across heavy-handed and not a team player; is it critical thinking or a language difference?; she needs to get to the point;  too much detail; and the list goes on.

I wonder, if we were given as much guidance in speaking and listening as we were with reading and writing, might our workforce be better communicators?  I certainly think so.

It’s never to late to learn.  Speaking that Connects specializes in speech and presentation, listening, language and learning for individuals and companies who want to close the communication gap and raise the bar on communication performance.

Eileen N. Sinett

When I was in third grade, I competed in a writing contest. The student with the best handwriting would have the privilege of writing the class letter to the President of the United States. Seems a bit silly today in this world of technology, but this was a few decades back. I wrote like a portrait artist paints and took second place. More importantly, I was told, “Had you remembered to indent your paragraphs, you would have easily been the “winner.” Perhaps that’s why white space is so important to me now.

What is white space? It’s the background or unprinted part of the page. You know, the margins at the top and sides, the space after a sentence and the line space between paragraphs – (oh, and don’t forget the indentations!).

But it’s not the white space on the page that interests me most, but the “Verbal White Space” that most speakers ignore, under-value and under-utilize.

Verbal white space is silence, the non-verbal aspect of communication. Like the white space of a printed page, it contrasts the words and makes them stand out. Verbal white space is more than simply pausing and being silent. Used effectively, it supports your audience’s listening attention, their comprehension as well as adds emphasis to your message. In addition, verbal white space allows you as the speaker, to observe the impact of your words on your listeners, gauge your effectiveness as a communicator and gently massage your delivery.

More is not better when it comes to words – both spoken and written.
Get comfortable with silence, use it regularly and strategically and you will improve both your speaking influence and your audience’s understanding.

For speech and presentation coaching that capitalizes on verbal white space visit me online or call (609) 799-1400.

Eileen N. Sinett

There is no doubt that Kate Middleton projects poise, prestige, and presence. As an international spokesperson, she needs to present authentically and with political savvy. This first speech was self-written and less than four minutes. She did little “wrong,” but from a coaching point of view, I see an opportunity for her to improve.

First the positives:
1- She took the time she needed to center herself and started her speech with silence.
2- She spoke clearly and directed her words, making with eye contact with her audience.
3- She limited her presentation to a key theme, The Tree House, and thanked the public for their support of the children’s hospice.
4- She personalized her speech using “I” in a heartfelt manner, ie. When I fist visited… and Today I see…..

Raising the bar on Kate’s speaking.
Watching Kate this morning, it appeared that she was coached to read a sentence in silence, then scoop up the written words into memory before voicing her message to the audience. That’s a speaking best practice, but using this technique one sentence at a time can detract from the speaker and the content. That’s what I experienced with Kate. She looked down to “get” a single sentence into her memory, then looked up to deliver it to her audience. Inevitably, she would be looking down at the last few words of each sentence. I began to anticipate this pattern and I bet other viewers did as well.

Kate’s speech was simple. She greeted and thanked her audience, mentioned her wish for her husband to be with her, and shared appreciation for those who supported the Children’s Hospice. Did she really need those notes?

Of course, I would have preferred that she didn’t have them written word for word, but that said, what she did deliver was simple, sound and safe.

Eileen N. Sinett